There is insidiousness at work in the idea of ‘accidental life,’ and I call it such, for any life apart from a Creator and intelligence is simply accidental. Some will not agree, and others will despise this observation, but it is true if logic means anything.

Image result for newborn baby

I have zero experience at motherhood, but fortunately I have eyes. Mothering is as old as time, and to deny a Creator, is to assault the origin and rightful place of mothers. True, the unbeliever will agree as to the importance of mothers, but God will be left out of His very providence of the human race.  Big mistake.

Time and ink will fail the narrative of mothers and the influence they have had, are having, and always will have in the nurture, love, and concern for their offspring, and even at a ripe old age, a 95 year mother will call her 65-year-old daughter, her ‘little girl.’ Very cool.

The love of a mother never diminishes, and there is a wiring which is unexplainable apart from divine intelligence. I think of the anguish of Mary the mother of the Lord; there was the appeal of the rightful mother when the wise Solomon said: ‘cut the baby in half;’ there are countless  mothers who give life and limb for their children, and express a love that is otherworldly. Thank God for mothers.

These few questions are not meant to be flippant, and will be random and braided throughout, but at the core, there are serious thoughts to ponder. Mothers, do chime in.

In the world-view of unbelief, or a world without the hand of God, in a universe where there was no ‘in the beginning:’ who cared for the first baby? There was the ‘first’ baby right? Surely all sane people believe there was the ‘first’ baby. After all, man did not appear as a full-grown adult needing no parental care to survive….

Since there is not a person alive who believes a human baby could care for itself, how does the baby live to survive to the age of one month, one week, or even one day?

By the way, we are not talking about apes here, we are speaking of humans.

Picture a newborn laying there. Needing parents right? No?  Hmmm. Ok then, giving a person the benefit of the doubt, the baby grew like a young tomato, an accident or offshoot of the vine, there ‘it’ is laying there. HOW does it care for itself without being eaten by a hyena, bear, or lion?

Image result for umbilical cord

WHO cut the umbilical cord? WAS there a cord? How does it eat? (even a baby robin would starve to death without its mother) WHAT does it eat? HOW does it reach for food? WHO comes running when the baby cries incessantly? WHY would the baby be left to fend for itself? WHEN could it possibly mature to live on its own? WHERE would it live?

HOW did the baby not freeze to death? WHERE was the mother, oops no mother. HOW did the baby not die of heat exhaustion? WHO cleaned the baby and changed it? Remember this is the first baby. Serious questions yes?  Did this baby have a name? Are you sure there were not parents?

Well, we can always believe the simplicity that Eve was the mother of ALL living.

And God bless mothering and mothers here, and everywhere.



About ColorStorm

Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture.
Gallery | This entry was posted in Daily news, Genesis- in the beginning and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Motherless?

  1. Pingback: All That Is Left Behind | Amusing Nonsense

  2. archaeopteryx1 says:

    By the way, we are not talking about apes here, we are speaking of humans.” – Your lack of knowledge never stops you from demonstrating it, does it? Humans ARE apes!


    • ColorStorm says:

      And all king Solomon’s drinking vessels were of gold, and all the vessels of the house of the forest of Lebanon were of pure gold; none were of silver: it was nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon. For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.

      So when apes were brought to Solomon………humans were part of the circus eh?

      Maybe some body else would like to help you with a little daylight.


      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        So when apes were brought to Solomon………humans were part of the circus eh?” – Does your textbook tell you which species of ape it was? Or did the anonymous, superstitious, scientifically-ignorant Bronze Age men who wrote it even know that there were five species of ape: Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas, Orangutans and Humans?


    • I don’t know anyone who believes humans are apes. Darwin himself didn’t even suggest such a thing. Science doesn’t even claim that. Regardless, not even an ape baby can survive without care.

      Liked by 1 person

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        not even an ape baby can survive without care” – No one said they could, IB, many reptiles, however lay eggs and go off and continue their lives, the babies hatch and can feed themselves immediately. Mammals, however, due to the fact that by their very name, relating to mammary glands, nurse, and consequently require maternal care.

        I suggest you read Dawkins’ The Ancestor’s Tale, and trace things back to the earliest mammals, from whom all of we apes evolved, and see for yourself when nursing began. Get back to me when you’ve done that —


  3. It’s a really good question, ColorStorm.


    • ColorStorm says:

      I think so.

      Walk through any maternity ward, and every single newborn would not live through the weekend.

      The ‘accidental’ act of evolution is perhaps caught on the horns of a dilemma.

      Liked by 1 person

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        Not at all – see my comment to IB —


        • ColorStorm says:

          Oh the distance some people travel to hide from God, but there is nowhere to go.

          It seems the point of the post sailed right over your head.


        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          I merely present facts. I have yet to see one of your posts that strictly stuck to facts, or in some cases, even recognized that they exist.


        • ColorStorm says:

          And yet here you are, Old faithful, spewing and arguing with someone who is delusional.

          Psycologists would suggest this speaks more to your mental state, then the person you are trying to debase.

          You may want to look into this observation, and simply ask yourself why you find my shortness of mind so interesting.

          But again, try to get the gist of the post, it’s really worth considering without your bias.


        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          ask yourself why you find my shortness of mind so interesting.” – I’ve explained this before, it’s because you come onto the blogs of my friends and spout your nonsense.


        • ColorStorm says:

          So, Mr Archx1 is the self appointed defender of OTHER peoples blogs; now that may get you the comment of the week award.

          Surely you are aware, (of course you are, because you are one voice of many) that my name appears on your ‘friends’ posts in which I have never even visited. Talk about nonsense….

          But enough of that hypocrisy, how did the ‘first’ baby survive?


  4. Eliza says:

    Love your invincible logic in the face of imbecilic ravings. God bless us.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Great article! The first person created was Adam. Adam wasn’t created as a baby. He was created as a man. Eve, the 2nd person created, was created as an adult woman not a baby. Great points! Mothers are so important! My wife is such a wonderful mother!

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s